Ed,Thank you very much for the nose gear anti-bounce fix! It works a treat. :(

Big thank you from me as well, phew...bounce solved. I also own a few Carenado models, this is the first that's been disappointing.Have to ad Carenado have been trying to help, by modifying the aircraft.cfg file, this fix found here on this forum has done the trick...Now I can go fly her...without bouncing off the runway. :( As for the night lighting, rain error - I have not tested it yet. :( Price was a bit steep in relation to what we use to get with the C206 etc....FS2004 popularity is far from dead....our virtual flying group save one or two - we all still fly FS2004, and we'll most likely stick with it. :)Bit of a bad easter egg to start with...but things are looking up.www.zsflyers.co.za South Africa

Tested the lighting problem... same ERROR.Only window one can see through is the one on the passenger door. :(Essentially you can therefore not fly this aircraft in rain at night...because you won't be able to see a thing....

I haven't been able to reproduce the opaque windows issue personally with any combination of weather, lighting, or time of day. Happy about that, but I can only get about 130 kias out of the Arrow in cruise at maybe 4500 msl, 24 squared. According to some info I've found on the net cruise is supposed to be up around 170 kts (true I presume, but even after converting kias to true there's a 25-30 kt discrepancy). Am I doing something wrong or am I mssing something? How's everybody else doing in this respect?from:http://www.pilotfriend.com/aircraft%20perf.../Piper/6/14.htm

Top Speed: 177 ktsCruise Speed: 172 kts

BTW for those still having bounce issues on landing after Ed's contact point fix, I got rid of mine entirely by changing "empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 1050" to "empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 1800" in the [weight_and_balance] section (or at least I think I did).Jim

I haven't been able to reproduce the opaque windows issue personally with any combination of weather, lighting, or time of day. Happy about that, but I can only get about 130 kias out of the Arrow in cruise at maybe 4500 msl, 24 squared. According to some info I've found on the net cruise is supposed to be up around 170 kts (true I presume, but even after converting kias to true there's a 25-30 kt discrepancy). Am I doing something wrong or am I mssing something? How's everybody else doing in this respect? Jim

I got about 147kts straight and level at sea level, nothing more.... I've asked for a refund from Carenado, sadly its their worst FS9 aircraft model to date, and yes I regret having to say that...I own a few Carenado aircraft, have always loved their work ; save the ADF radios that can't dial decimals on some aircraft.This FS9 one gets the thumbs down.Hope they sort out these issues and re-release a version II or something.

Well heck, I didn't have the engine running when I did the opacity check the first time, just tried it again after re-reading Ed's post and sure enough my windows are opaque too. Not a huge deal to me though as I rarely fly at night and I'm sure Carenado will release a patch. Maybe if enough people gripe the patch will include a 2D panel as well.I think that website I posted above must be wrong on the speed. I did a little more searching and found some other rescources that list speeds fairly consistent with what I'm seeing in the sim.After patching this one I'd sure like to see Carenado open that Gmax file back up, put a Turbo Arrow cowling on it, and release a "Turbo Arrow expansion pack" like they did for the 206 float/cargo version... ...and then build us a 185 with float/ski variations.Jim

Hi There Although I haven't "flown" it much yet, the performance of the Caranedo Arrow is about right, I'm just finishing off a complex conversion on a well used 1979 Arrow IV (<> 4 hrs only) and we get about 130 Kts at 23" and 2400 rpm which is what I'm getting in FS9 - leaned to peak power even at 2-3000 feet. 16" and 2400 rpm clean gives around 100 Kts and 19" and 2400 gear down gives the same - these are the figures we use and they are also close in FS9.The performance quoted above is probably TAS for a Turbo Arrow at altitude. A couple of things: Take off - you should be able to rotate at around 65-70 kts not 80+ in the model - not enough elevator authority? The real one does need a fair "tug" on the wheel to get it off though.Descent with flap at 75-80 kts seems a bit fast - I notice the flaps don't extend visually beyond about 15 degrees where the real max is 40 from memory. Great visual model though and with a few tweaks would be a very good addition for FS9.regardsSimonBrighton UK

Has anyone worked out how to transplant some more up to date avionics into the Arrow? I had a go with RXP and Simflyers GNS430/530 but the images kept distorting or shearing or being cropped- it looked really horrible so have gone back to the Corenado fit. For those who have the DF Archer, try using its air file just increase the engine HP and the tank size then you will have the next best thing to a real Arrow. Better still add a turbo and 41 inches of boost and fly the Tubo Arrow V! with just minor tweaking this aeroplane is petty much spot on.

Just for those who are interested, I have received an updated model file from Carenado, which solves the night lighting/opaque window issue. I imagine the public update (SP1) will not be far away. Hopefully they are addressing any other issues that users have emailed to them.It is good that they listen and react promptly. :(

Just for those who are interested, I have received an updated model file from Carenado, which solves the night lighting/opaque window issue. I imagine the public update (SP1) will not be far away. Hopefully they are addressing any other issues that users have emailed to them.It is good that they listen and react promptly. :(

Yep, they sent me the new model too. I'd emailed them actually to ask if they'd consider a Turbo Arrow expansion pack, their reply "We will analyze the option of the turbo Arrow", so fingers crossed... :( Jim

Yep, they sent me the new model too. I'd emailed them actually to ask if they'd consider a Turbo Arrow expansion pack, their reply "We will analyze the option of the turbo Arrow", so fingers crossed... :( Jim

Have received an updated model from Carenado. Solved the night lighting issue with the windows.Also noticed the specs of the aircraft are pretty much correct as it is NOT a Turbo Arrow IV. Also doesn't have the 3 bladed prop of the Turbo Arrow IV...Would be great if it was a Turbo Arrow, so if there will be an expansion pack... I'll go for it.My faith has been restored in Carenado.... their resolve of these issues was swift... Well done, and thank you again for another great FS9 add-on.FS9 is far from dead....And FS9 remains my preferred sim, as I'm sure it does for 1000s of simmers. :(

Is the update to the night lighting issue only available on a request basis? No mention of it on the Carenado website...

Is the update to the night lighting issue only available on a request basis? No mention of it on the Carenado website...

I think there may be some other things they want to fix and want to upload one SP to fix all.If you have a problem with the nightlighting right now send them an email.

Has anyone noticed the pilot's Yoke? :( When you pull all the way back on it, it bends to the left. :( Notice that it does not occur on the co-pilot's yoke.

Has anyone noticed the pilot's Yoke? :( When you pull all the way back on it, it bends to the left. :( Notice that it does not occur on the co-pilot's yoke.

That's not a mistake..or if it is, it just so happens to mimic real world behavior. Weird, I know, but that's how it is!

My god. That plane is absolutely beautiful. That said, I'm not buying it I'm afraid... I've never been really into GA. I prefer the old jetliners, like the Boeing 707, 727 and 737-200, also the cloassic Boeing 747 series.Still though, a remarkable effort of Carenado!Pity that there's no 2D cockpit though. It's a bit ironic, since I've always said I want to have a VC. I do, I really do want a VC, but during climbout, approach and landing, I just need the 2D. I want all instruments organized in front of me in a way I can quickly get to them, and in the VC that's not the case. In all other phases of flight though, I like the VC. I can look around in the cokcpit, admire the gauges, all that. I won't be really sorry if that means I'm not anymore a "respected simmer" (which is just idiotic, for as far as I'm concernec. What, you are not anymore a respected painter if you use a new type of paint instead of the older type? Isn't the personal enjoyment what ultimately matters?). For me both have a function: 2D for functionality and precision plus quick acces and performance, and then the VC for enjoyment and a nice perspective when things are less hectic.Now that I think of it, I also tend to use the VC when I'm handflying an aircraft. This is mainly because I have great difficulty flying the plane with the 2D cockpit. There are products out there that give you a separate "landing view", but these are a minority. In such cases, 2D is fine, but if there isn't, the 2D panel obstructs my view and I can't see where I'm heading. So therefor I use the VC, because all switches I absolutely have to use (gear, flaps, spoilers, throttle) and all gauges I really need to see (altimeter, speed, compass, HIS, ya know, all important gauges) are all either assigned to convenient buttons on the keyboard or (most of them) my joystick, or they are in such view that I can very easily see them. So for hand flying, the VC simply works a lot better for me.In the end, it's just preference and what works best for you. What I have said here is my use of the VC and the 2D panel: both have a function and are an integral part of my flying experience, and if one of them is missing, I'm at a loss, though I confess my pain is greater if there is no good 2D panel. If there is no VC, I'll usually keep looking for a model that does have a VC, and only then I'll stop my search. It's actually like a chemical reaction, now that I think of it: an equilibrium has to be found, and only then the reaction is "at rest". Same with my 2D/VC preference.Please don't crucify me for this post, just my own experience on the matter.